Fri 12 Mar 2010
HIGH LIFE- Bakwas bandh!
21 January 2009, 13:37
( Read
more… )
Fri 12 Mar 2010
21 January 2009, 13:37
( Read
more… )
Fri 12 Mar 2010
21 January 2009, 13:47
( Read
more… )
Fri 12 Mar 2010
Un excellent travail sous forme de galerie sur le portfolio flash du photographe new-yorkais Marco Guerra. Il collabore entre autre avec Vogue, Condé Nast et Levi’s.

Fri 12 Mar 2010
What are (or is) the best iPhone gps app these days.?
– R.B. Pray
Fri 12 Mar 2010
A Vatican official commented recently on the issue of clerical dress, trying to make a connection between the lack of vocations and priests not wearing their collars or an identifiable uniform. I find such arguments a bit incredulous. We keep looking for some “reason” behind the lack of priestly vocations in the developed world.
But what about the neuralgic issue of clerical dress?
Over the years I have been on different sides of this question. By now I have arrived at a “radical middle of the road” opinion. There are times when it is appropriate and even pastorally useful to wear the collar. However, the old saying “The habit does not make the priest/monk/nun” holds true. There are also times when it is inappropriate and even counterproductive. (I have seen monks in their habits in movie theaters and wondered whether they were trying to give some form of witness to the theater-goers or, in fact, had nothing else to wear! I was not impressed or edified; I was actually embarassed that they were the center of attention and a distraction. They knew everyone was watching them. It struck me as highly narcissistic.)
Seminarians and younger clergy tend to wear clerical attire quite regularly; clerical dress is usually expected in seminaries. In younger clergy, it may be an outward expression of their desire to develop a priestly identity. Eventually we/they come to realize that “identity” is on the inside, not the outside. It is a profound spiritual process guided by the Holy Spirit. This is a very intricate developmental process for those aspiring to be priests and the newly ordained.
Another issue worth a comment or two is the kind of liturgical vestments priests wear at the altar. This is obviously a matter of taste (and to some degree…budget.) Looking in Church catalogues these days one can find a gradual increase in the number of old fashioned vestments for sale: albs, chasubles, cassocks and surplices, etc. The return to this old fashioned apparel is curious to me. I have always wondered why any man — clergy or not — would want to wear lace — and in front of an audience as well? What is the message?
Let’s get even a bit bolder and take a look at the Pope.
Franco Zeffirelli, the 84 year old Italian film, stage and opera director was quoted in a recent interview about wanting to “make over” the Pope. Zeffirelli contrasted the media-savvy Pope John Paul II,
an outdoorsman who had little use for fancy papal attire,” with Pope Benedict XVI “whose papal vestments have been done over to be too sumptuous and showy…(Benedict) has taken to wearing some eye-stopping outfits in his public appearances, including a red velvet cape trimmed with ermine, a fur-trimmed stocking cap that some first mistook for a Santa Claus hat, and bright red Prada loafers.
Interesting observations from an interesting bystander!
It is not uncommon these days to see the Holy Father attended by one chaplain wearing rather modern liturgical attire and his new master of ceremonies, a younger priest, wearing lace. The Pope’s former master of ceremonies, now an archbishop, seemed much more contemporary in his dress than his successor. And this is more and more reflected in the return to ornate papal vestments. (Who decides what the pope wears — the Pope or his master of ceremonies?) Is this a sign of coming attractions?
Beneath it all, my real concern is what message clerical attire sends to the People of God. The challenge of priesthood, as I see it, is to be as relevant as possible to people in their daily life experiences and struggles, helping to mediate Christ’s presence to them in today’s culture. The priest cannot afford to be perceived as a vestige of a by-gone era. The challenge of the gospel is always fresh and contemporary! And as for clerical attire, it should not draw inordinate attention to itself or the wearer, nor become an obstacle to a priests’ mission and ministry to the People of God in the world today.
And your thoughts on this one, bloggers?
Fri 12 Mar 2010
Aaron Kelly
Hometown: Sonestown, PA
Currently Resides: Sonestown, PA
Age: 16
Songs Performed:
“Here Comes Goodbye†by Rascal Flatts
(Feb. 24)
“My Girl†by The Temptations (March
2)
“I’m Already
There†by Lonestar (March 10)
Favorite Quote or Motto:
Fri 12 Mar 2010


AMERICAN IDOL revealed this season’s Top 12 finalists (Didi Benami, Crystal Bowersox, Lacey Brown, Lee Dewyze, Andrew Garcia, Casey James, Aaron Kelly, Michael Lynche, Siobhan Magnus, Paige Miles, Katie Stevens and Tim Urban) as Katelyn Epperly, Todrick Hall, Alex Lambert and Lilly Scott were eliminated from the competition after receiving the fewest of America’s votes. The AMERICAN IDOL journey has ended for Epperly, 19, from West Des Moines, IA, who sang “I Feel The Earth Moveâ€; Hall, 24, from Arlington, TX, who sang “Somebody To Loveâ€; Lambert, 19, from North Richland Hills, TX, who sang “Troubleâ€; and Scott, 20, from Denver, CO, who sang “I Fall To Pieces.â€
Click on the picture to go
to an audio recap of performances, Â judges remarks and
favorite quotes.












Tune in to FOX6 Tuesday, March 16th from 7p – 9p as a new IDOL stage will be revealed and America’s Top 12 will take the stage to perform songs by The Rolling Stones.
Fri 12 Mar 2010
Fri 12 Mar 2010
Fri 12 Mar 2010
CNN takes a closer look at the health care proposals of both candidates (I strongly recommend you to read the article in its entirety):
Both presidential candidates want to turn employer-sponsored health insurance on its head. A principal goal: to make sure more Americans get coverage.
But in helping the 45 million uninsured, both Republican nominee John McCain and his Democratic rival Barack Obama could prompt radical changes in on-the-job insurance, which currently covers 164 million people.
“Both McCain’s and Obama’s plans would move coverage in ways that changes the nature of the employer-sponsored system,” said James Klein, head of the American Benefits Council, which represents larger employers.
McCain and Obama take very different paths to what they say is the same endpoint – reforming health care.
As part of McCain’s plan, employees would lose the tax exemption for company-sponsored health insurance. Instead, taxpayers would get a refundable tax credit of $2,500 for single filers, or $5,000 for families, to cover the costs of insurance bought on the job or on their own in the individual market.
By doing this, McCain would level the playing field between those who get insurance on the job, where benefits aren’t taxed, and those who buy it their own, where it is subject to tax. The tax credit would let more of the uninsured afford coverage.
Obama, on the other hand, is promising to push employers to cover more Americans as part of his health care proposal. He would require larger companies provide insurance to employees or contribute toward the cost of a national plan, while giving small businesses a tax credit to entice them to offer coverage to their workers.
The plans of both candidates raise the concerns of employers and experts, who say the proposals could wind up undermining the nation’s employer-based health insurance system.
My the glass is half full take: both would cover quite some of those who are currently uninsured and, on average, make health care more affortable.
My the glass is half empty take: both have their very considerable weaknesses.